Psychology

The value of providing rewards to employees by organizations remains an important aspect that can shape and develop productivity and growth. By providing these individuals with the proper amount of recognition, it can boost their ability to function effectively in the workplace. Seeing this, the study made by Hsu (2004) considers not only the value of reward allocation within the workplace but also considers the corresponding factors that influence its development.

By using Chinese businesses as an example, the study sought to understand the features and aspects that shape its reward allocation. At the same time, the study also seeks to identify important criteria that shape the ability of employers to provide these reward systems. This can be made by designating a particular category as it relates to the particular individual or employee. Due to this, considerations are given towards important values in the workplace and serve as a vital aspect of implementation.

In the introduction part, the authors argue about the importance of reward allocation. In particular, the study sees this as a vital process that shapes and influences individual and group performance in the workplace. Similarly, since the main focus of the study looked into Chinese companies, it argued that Chinese managers vary in the way they choose and designate a reward system for their employees (Hsu et.al, 2004). At the same time, the introduction part provided important researches that have been made concerning reward allocation and what areas have been considered vital for its development. Here, it uses the leader-member exchange theory to fully explain the ability of managers to provide rewards and incentives to its employees. Such approach was then used to create an argument on why Chinese businesses give importance to loyalty, competence and relationship (Hsu, et.al, 2004).

The next part of the study looked into how Chinese categorizes its employees and the way they practice differential management. Here, particular attention was given in the way Chinese businesses give importance to the aspect of loyalty in improving their reward system. Hsu et.al also argued on the capacity of employers to provide special attention or rewards to people who are related to them by blood or important social acquaintances (Hsu, et.al, 2004). Given these, the important factors considered by the authors that are relevant to the development of reward allocation on Chinese businesses include (1) loyalty, (2) competence and relationship. Each of these principles shape the way businesses assess their abilities accordingly.

After pointing out this aspect, the study then argues about employee categorization and the application of reward allocation decisions. In particular, the study argues on the significance of how loyalty, competence, and relationship provide better ways for employees to become included within the group. Here, they are considered to be insiders while outsiders are those employees who have limited ability to engage into close relationship with their superiors and who are unable to address the three process effectively (Hsu, et.al, 2004). This then provides the study to categorize a type of employee under different circumstances. Each of these was labeled H1 to H8 and their descriptions vary. With these, the study was able to designate important ideas to the relationship of these three ideas as it relate to a particular employee.

Following this description involves identifying the meaning of employee categorization and, allocation context and reward allocation decisions to the overall study. Here, the authors said that the aspect of fairness remains to be an essential element to make reward allocation decisions (Hsu, et.al, 2004). Not only does this develop giving employees the rewards that they deserve, it is also crucial to enhance productivity within organizations. To support this, the section pointed out some studies that are vital in seeking to explain such relationships within the chosen topic.

The next part of the study looked into the methodology used by the study. First, it considered the participants used by the authors. Here, a large population was used to measure the variables in the study. It can be seen that 270 managers participated from 70 companies in Taiwan (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004, p.225).At the same time, the study also pointed out relevant percentages as it relates to the particular age group measured, educational background, and the corresponding position of each one.

Another aspect that the methodology looked into is the research design and process. Seeing this, the design used by the authors was a scenario experiment. Here, participants are given materials that they would react on and particular attributes were given to each of these (high or low) (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004).These then are associated with important categories mentioned in the introduction that include (1) loyalty, (2) relationship, and (3) competence. These materials are then randomized to allow a better way to measure the responses made by the participants in the study. The main process involves allowing participants to act as managers and allocate particular percentage of bonus to eight (8) employees who they think should get these incentives (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004). Along these criteria, the study also used particular items to identify and provide better ways to use these variables. These then are pointed out in the Liker scales.

After the application of this method, the results category highlighted the appropriate tests in determining the responses among participants of the study. Here, manipulation tests is used to effectively understand the value and validity of the measurement used. In particular, it uses a t-test as an instrument for checking the effectiveness of manipulations (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004). In particular, it uses statistical variables and numbers to illustrate the value of each exercise or questions given to participants. Here, it considered measurement and results of the (1) difference between high and low loyalty, (2) close and distant relationships, and (3) high and low competence (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004).

After this, the study now looked into its particular results.  Since this is a quantitative analysis, it has provided a table for readers to view the means and standards deviations of each component used. Here, it provided better ways to understand the results of the respondents and highlight the relationship of these ideas together with that of the overall problem. For example, the study argued that the reward percentage for competent subordinates was higher than the overall mean (12.5) regardless of the employees relationship with or loyalty to the allocator (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004, p. 226). Likewise, the study also sought to understand the value of the hypothesis by testing it. To determine the validity of the hypothesis in the study, it used a general linear model to determine its approach. Given these, the study also argued that the correlation results show that three demographic variables, including education, position and seniority were significantly related to the reward percentage (p  0.01) (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004, p.226).

Moreover, the results section also pointed out several important points relating to the value of the patterns of interactions between the variables administered to respondents. Here, aspects between these three differ in statistical results and illustrate variety according ones particular impact and relationship with the majority of those who participated in the testing. By addressing the ability of (1) loyalty, (2) relationship, and (3) competence and how it relates to one another, the study was then able to argue about each ones impact to the workplace and to one another as well.

The next aspect discussed in the paper is the results of the data given with regards to employee categorization, allocation context and reward allocation decisions. Like the previous results, it provides statistical data to prove better ways to justify and promote the impact of these towards the facilitation of reward allocation. At the same time, these figures seek to illustrate the essential principles shaping the value of these principles as it relates to the overall process of making reward allocation decisions. Given these, the study then argues that results suggest that in different allocation contexts, allocators used different ways to allocate rewards depending on the level of relationship, loyalty and competence (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004, p.227).

Careful attention was also given in the relationship of the results in the public and private context. In Chinese businesses this remains to be significant because it creates distinction and differences in the way processes are applied and addressed by these managers. This then provides a point to justify that higher rewards were given to people who work within a private sector than those in the public one.

The discussion part provides readers with the ability to summarize what the results provided. In particular, it argued that indeed the process of (1) loyalty, (2) relationship, and (3) competence equally shape the value of providing reward allocation by managers in Chinese businesses. Given these, the study also makes the approach of defining its contributions to the field. It highlighted the interactions between these three categories and examined its impact as it relates to the value of the allocation context itself (Hua, Hsu, and Cheng 2004). Due to this, the study also agreed that the ideas presented here can also be applicable within the cultural parameters. On the other hand, the study also provided its limitations and highlight what areas of this study can be critiqued and improved. This can then provide readers with an alternative approach of understanding their relationship and value.